Warp wrote:

>   Machine code and byte-code are different things.
>   Well, yes, they are very similar. The difference is that machine code is
> the one that the processor reads directly (the textual representation of
> machine code is called assembler (or assembly, I'm not sure)). Byte-code is
> similar to machine code, but it's interpreted by the program. Byte-code has
> more freedom on what commands you can implement and what things it can do.
> You can put support for very application-specific commands in your byte-code
> interpreter; this is not usually possible with machine code. The avantage
> of byte-code over interpreted source code is speed.

Okay, but how can byte-code be platform dependant then?

>   Compressing the text has little effect in speed. It may have some minor
> speed improvement since you don't have to compare 8 characters but just 2,
> but in the average the speed improvement will probably be very small. The
> length of the keywords, identifier names and so on is not so important.
>   Parsing and interpreting a file doesn't need string search. Even when
> you are looking for several keywords which have an identical beginning
> (such as int, interior, interpolate, intersection, intervals) you only have
> to go through the text once, without having to go back and forth.

What about control aids? They would process much faster in byte-code. Thorsten
says it already does something like this though...

--
David Fontaine   <dav### [at] faricynet>   ICQ 55354965
Please visit my website:  http://davidf.faricy.net/

Post a reply to this message